East Rockers Seek Parking Answers, & Fixes

In addition to creating more neighborhood parking zones, the Board of Alders has decreased parking requirements for new developments. It has done the former in response to constituents' requests. And I support the latter - it will make new housing somewhat less costly (which is not the same thing as affordable). But both call for an expanded TTP presence and, in all likelihood, more staffing.

I think part of the parking problem in East Rock is due to the new developments here. The Audubon, a block from my house, charges $130/month for a parking space. As a matter of policy, this is a good thing. If the developer did not charge for parking, rents would be even higher than they currently are. But some tenants will risk the occasional $35 ticket by parking on my street rather than paying the charge. The same thing is true for Corsair, which charges $100/month for a parking space.

While I understand Mark's frustration, making the permits citywide would defeat the purpose of neighborhood parking zones. The zones were created to increase the chance that people who live in a neighborhood can park near their home.

On a somewhat related note, I discovered that Yale effectively subsidizes employees who drive to work. According to Yale's parking webpage, parking charges only cover 65% of Yale's cost of providing parking https://your.yale.edu/work-yale/campus-services/parking-and-transportation-options/parking.
I think Yale should (1) gradually increase parking fees so that they eventually fully cover its costs in providing parking and (2) use the added revenues solely for employee benefits, such as health promotion programs.

Why not use more parking boxes (rather than individual meters) in these areas. Everyone would have to punch in to park. Those with neighborhood vouchers would get free or reduced rates ( not really clear free parking is a right for anyone), everyone else can pay. My ride to work is filled with people pulling in on East rock streets only to board the Yale shuttle or walk to some central location. We really need those people out of cars. But free parking only encourages the behavior.

Kevin McCarthy- I would have Yale and Yale New Haven Hospital/Health systems to strongly encourage all employees and students to take a shuttle, bus or train to get to and from work, school, entertainment and activities and Yale should expand their shuttle routes and schedules to accommodate and encourage employees and students to leave their cars at home. They should also require all employees with cars to register them with a Yale parking authority and assign them a parking pass card and require them to use Yale and YNHH affiliated 24/7 parking lots, and strongly discourage them from parking on the street or non-affiliated garages unless they live nearby. This would free up parking for residents and visitors to popular shopping and dining and entertainment areas like Downtown, State St, Wooster Square, etc. While we are at it, UNH, QU, and Southern, etc should run shuttles for students and staff to get to shopping, nightlife, and restaurants, etc. I agree with reducing the number of parking spots for residential buildings, but not to the extent that has happened recently in the new multi unit buildings. While the number of parking spots can be significantly reduced when we have better public transit schedules and routes, and more dedicated bike lanes, not everyone is going to give up their vehicle, they'll just eventually switch to electric fueled ones. Plus if you want people to come into the city and spend their money at area businesses and enjoy the nightlife, then you have to have parking, unless we can get CT transit to add bus routes and schedules to accommodate suburbanites coming into the city, as well as city residents going out to the suburbs to work and shop. I have had friends and family in NYC and in Chicago (and lived there for a while,) and parking was extremely difficult to find close to work and home. Luckily both cities have great mass transit, but circling for parking 6-8 blocks away sucks, especially in a snow storm and dodging parking tickets.

I agree with Kevin on the need for all entities to stop subsidizing automobile travel, particularly single-occupant vehicle travel. If driving continues to be subsidized not only will we never address climate change but little old New Haven will never again regain its past glory and not reach its full potential as a city moving into the future. The most successful cities don't subsidize automobile use.

With regard to on-street parking, its all about supply and demand. They're not making more on-street parking, thus the supply of it is fixed. Its the tragedy of the commons. The more popular, denser areas seeing high demands necessitate managing on-street parking - thus the need for residential parking zones, which I think we all agree could and should be better done by the City. I'd suggest part of this be the creation of Parking Benefit Districts: https://whyy.org/articles/ideas-worth-stealing-parking-benefit-districts/

One solution would be higher fees for neighborhood parking permits, then using those fees to improve neighborhood amenities and to increase enforcement.

This would increase the availability of spots, in part by encouraging some people to pay for off street parking.

Rachel, I agree with you about free parking, which contrary to popular perception is not a constitutionally protected right. (And I live on one of the blocks where Yale workers routinely park illegally - the shuttle stops at the end of my block.) But the vast majority of streets outside of downtown have free parking; (including mine, one block away from the edge of downtown). I very much doubt there is a political appetite to substantially expand meters. And if the city did so, it would need to substantially expand TTP staffing.

Heather thanks. I am sure there are tons of Yale and hospital employees who will argue, correctly, that non-car alternatives are impossible for them given where they live, work schedules, etc. And to be fair, Yale does provide financial incentives for non-car alternatives. But I do think the city should push Yale, through the Overall Parking Plan, to reduce its subsidization of driving.

The relationship between parking supply, demand, and transportation alternative usage is complicated. If parking supply is limited and expensive, parking demand will go down and people will use other alternatives. But the transition will be bumpy.

If folks think parking is a challenge here, they should visit Chicago, my hometown. The meters are enforced 24/7; I got a parking ticket on Thanksgiving Day. Meters in the Loop cost $6.50/hour (double the charge in Manhattan). In spite of all this, the Loop (unlike much of Chicago's South and West Sides) is thriving.

As maternity leave is up to twelve weeks I'm concerned there is no one in charge at Traffic and Parking. How does the city function with such laxness.

There are no more parking permit tags for cars. Also, there are no resources for residents to know who is allowed to park in their district.

This causes residents to have to memorize which cars they usually see parked on their streets, and even with that workaround, it still doesn't inform the residents if those cars have permits or not.

Nobody can intuitively know who has parking permits, and this causes animosity among neighbors.

Lack of convenient, free or affordable will influence many to live, shop and work outside of New Haven. Many folks I know from the surrounding suburban towns have stopped coming to New Haven for shopping and dining because the lack of convenient parking, which might be a reason for the many empty storefronts in New Haven. Also, many have chosen to live in the suburbs, rather than New Haven for a better quality of life, which includes convenient free or low cost parking.

I live on a street with residential parking. One of the residents here owns 4 cars and parks them all on the street despite the fact that she has a driveway, a large backyard and a two car garage. Evidently the city allows this behavior. If we are talking about amending the residential parking rules, let's start by limiting the number of cars owned by the same person that can be parked on the street.

Esbey, there used to be a $10:fee for the permits. There would be an equity issue if the city established a substantially higher fee. I could afford a fee of $100 per year. There are many NH residents who could not.

Tommy1, as to your second point, see (also available in Spanish)

https://www.newhavenct.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=42709

Chernobyl, there is undoubtedly someone in charge of TTP on an interim basis - someone is signing the employees' timesheets. I doubt that person would feel comfortable making permanent personnel changes. And if the problem is too few enforcement personnel (as I suspect), that is a BOA issue.

Cove'd creating a parking benefits district might help. But the city cannot create one on its own authority, it would require a change in state law. CGS § 7-202 et seq. permits the creation of parking authorities, such as New Haven's. But their powers are limited to off-street facilities.

Heather; Yale and YNHH do discourage use of cars through high parking fees. For most employees, use of public transport is near impossible, dangerous, and just takes too long. Have you forgotten the many NHI articles in which the bus drivers themselves tell us how extremely dangerous their buses are for themselves and patrons? How they need to be walled off from riders? If the buses are unsafe for the drivers, they are unsafe for riders. So long as New Haven provides free parking in neighborhoods like East Rock and The Hill, employees will take advantage of it. If there is a demand for the parking, the city should matter those streets. While street parking may not be worth $130/mo., a monthly pass should surely go for at least $20-$50/month for those who want to use street parking rather than have a private space.

FYI, all, New Haven is not NYC, or even Chicago or Denver. There's little commuter rail except to the west, no subway, and limited bus service. Moreover, residential density is too low to support the arts and commerce that people want with only those within walking or biking distance. Suburbanites, and those even those in Westville and Morris Cove need to take cars to patronize restaurants and theaters.

Kevin, given that Yale charges some over $200/mo for parking, and all in excess of the $130/mo you say is the commercial rate, how is it subsidizing parking/car use?
https://your.yale.edu/work-yale/campus-services/parking-and-transportation-options/parking/faculty-and-staff-parking-0

@Kevin McCarthy,

Thanks for the information. Unfortunately, it doesn't resolve what I mentioned. Since parking permit hang tags are no longer used, there is no way for residents to know which cars have parking permits and which ones don't.

There are no resources for residents to check to see if the cars parked on their streets have parking permits or not. It has become a guessing game.

Parking is pretty convenient just about anywhere in New Haven - on-street, garages, lot parking located usually within a 1-2 minute walk tops. Last I checked, there's tens of thousands of parking spaces in New Haven alone. Too much parking infrastructure perhaps - I wouldn't be surprised if the city-owned garages (including debt services) in the aggregate don't pay for themself through user fees, even before COVID hit. Hence parking can't be free (1) for the parking system to operate (else taxes would be even higher) and (2) to also manage high demands when they do occur. I doubt there's a coincidence that Cambridge MA, for example, has both a lower property tax rate and probably less than half the amount of parking compared to New Haven. Of course other factors are at play, but think about it. As far as New Haven losing business to the suburbs, I also doubt that's increasing or much of a concern these days (its not the '60s anymore) especially now with all these new residential buildings going up here. And as far as transit goes, it is actually pretty convenient to take the bus to downtown from Morris Cove and Westville if one tries it. From Westville Center, the service frequency along the Whalley line to downtown increased recently if I'm not mistaken and has pretty short headways of 10-15 mins and late service into the night.

1644, many Yale and YNHH employees have no practical alternative to driving and both employers charge for parking. But at least at Yale, the charges fall well short of the cost of providing parking. Apart from the associated environmental and health costs, the subsidization is uneconomic. Yale would lose employees if it increased parking charges by 50% overnight to fully recover its costs. But if it gradually increased charges, with the revenues going back to employees, both it and the city would benefit.

Tommy1, there is no such thing as free parking. Someone is paying the cost of the land and the facility's maintenance expenses.

@Kevin McCarthy,

This is a small case of miscommunication. You have not understood my message. Let's try again.

Without parking permit hang tags, nobody knows who has purchased parking permits and who has not purchased parking permits. Let's look at an example:

Every day, Joe Schmoe drives home from work at approximately 5:15PM. He lives on Bradley Street. When he arrives at Bradley Street, which is in a residential parking zone, there are always between 15 to 20 cars parked on that street. How can he tell which cars have parking permits and which cars don't?

In the past it was easy. Every car had a parking permit hang tag, but that is no longer the case. Parking permit hang tags are no longer issued, so there is no way to decipher which cars have parking permits and which ones don't.

Also, there are no resources for residents to check which cars have parking permits. For this reason, residents do not know which cars have parking permits and which cars do not have parking permits.

I'm a bit torn on this subject. In my part of ER most but not all houses have driveways. Because of that I couldn't back some neighbors push for a parking zone. Its pretty clear that every morning people who work downtown park here and walk in but I see that more as a positive rather than a negative; more eyes on the street. That being said, in certain parts of the neighborhood there are fewer driveways (more street parking residents) and adjacencies with dense projects like the Corsair that may bring penny pinchers avoiding pay parking in their garage (or current or future non garaged projects which IMHO should have a ride share covenant built into their leases). These areas should have zone parking out to some reasonable radius/buffer.

1644, the 65% cost recovery number comes from Yale. I assume your alma mater knows what it is talking about. Part of its costs are due to the garages it has built in recent years, which are incredibly expensive.

Tommy1, thanks. But enforcement was very limited, even when there were tags. I've lived in SoHu for 30 years. My block is a 15 minute walk to Old Campus. Yalies and others have parked there, notwithstanding calls by neighbors to the city.

Esteban, a fundamental principle of municipal law is that cities can only do what the state allows them to do. There is no CT law that allows municipalities to limit the number of cars a resident can own I would be astounded if such a bill was introduced, much less passed.

Kevin, the inability to create Parking Benefit Districts at present is a bummer that should be changed. While at it, the New Haven Parking Authority should be amended to have authority over both off-street parking and on-street parking. The current way where the Traffic Department looks over on-street parking while the Parking Authority looks over off-street parking makes little to no sense. Better yet, it'd probably make most sense to combine the parking authority fully with the traffic department, and city engineering as relates to transportation infrastructure, into a single City DOT so all facets transportation are rowing in the same direction...

Hilarious article.

"My least favorite place to visit is Cambridge because there is no parking." Incorrect. There is very little completely-free parking for non-residents. Cambridge has plenty of garages, hundreds of parking meters, and the only people who get residential zone parking permits are people whose cars are registered in Cambridge.

New Haven considers a lease good enough to get a parking permit for your out-of-state car. Which is crazy. You are literally declaring to the city that you live here, possibly for years, but your car is registered somewhere else. Let's fix that, the same way Cambridge fixed it. Only issue residential permits for cars with a New Haven registration.

Who pays the local taxes? Shouldn't cars registered in Connecticut, contributing to the city tax base, have an advantage for on-street parking?

Mr. McCarthy,
The question is not how many cars one is allowed to own, but rather how may public parking spaces is one allowed to take.

Estaban, same problem - no authority for the city to regulate that either. (And even less chance the legislature would enact enabling legislation.)

Cove'd, the legislature did something like that for Hartford (CGS § 7-204a). From a drafting perspective, it would be straightforward to extend this provision.

David Backeberg, I may be mistaken, but I believe for the owner or lessee of car registered out of state to get a neighborhood parking permit, they have to pay NH property taxes on the car.

@1644

Are you sure public transportation is dangerous compared to driving? There are tens of thousands of traffic accidents every year in Connecticut, and hundreds of road deaths (to say nothing of pedestrians and cyclists who are injured or killed).

The street parking is so bad near my house that I keep my car, my wifes car, and our third beater car all out on the street and snag up spaces close to my home during the week. That way if we have guests mainly on the weekend they can all use our driveway which can accommodate up to 4 cars.

I sometimes just wish the city would mark parking spaces for residential street parking in East Rock; then it would help force people to park in such a way that leaves room for others. Can't tell you how often one car parks such a weird distance from the other that they effectively take up two "spaces."

One more reason I prefer going to other towns to do business.
Every taxed residence should get at least one universal parking pass for anywhere in the city. NO FEES

Everyone whining about parking should be thankful that they have so few problems, that parking rises to the level of public grievance in their world.

Gotta go now, feeling a little nauseous.

Sorry just read Good Old Days post. Maybe you East Rockers should be ticketing people for having 3 cars and an empty driveway, instead of driving off people trying to spend money, or visit family and friends. Hahahaha!!! This!...this why we can't fix real problems.

I was horrified to learn from someone on that CMT call that there is a city proposal circulating that would take away parking spaces on one side of Orange Street, between Cold Spring and Humphrey. Yes, half of the parking on that long stretch of Orange Street would be eliminated to make a new bike lane. Cycling and pedestrian activity are very important components of our transportation system. Orange Street has had a bike lane and I'm very supportive of ways to make it safer and more accessible for bikers. But taking away half of the parking on Orange Street, in a densely populated residential neighborhood would be a crushing blow to residents and businesses alike. So many residents depend on the off-street parking, as do the markets, eateries and businesses. It's great to see a protected bike lane moving forward on Whitney, and I hope they keep the roads around East Rock Park closed to vehicles. But the Orange Street proposal is a non-starter.

Beyonddiscussion, except for students living on campus, we all pay property taxes. Homeowners pay directly, tenants through their rent. The local road network supported by these taxes overwhelmingly serve cars, even though about 30% of NH households don't have cars. It would be unreasonable to expect that 30% of the road network be devoted to alternative forms. But bike lanes on major bike routes is reasonable.

The city clerks office can issue parking permit stickers with a QR code. Make the code lead to a verification webpage listing only the matching license plate. Then let residents self police the fakers (they'll notice them) and call in the tow trucks that can verify the scofflaws with the QR code. Problem solved and no extra staff required.

KM,

There are already bike lanes on Orange that have served us well. BD is talking about protected lanes that require a whole parking lane to be removed.

Regarding the lack of car ownership in the city…these roads don't just serve passenger vehicles and bicycles; they also serve public transportation and they're an instrument of commerce and allow public safety vehicles (fire and police) to get places quickly.

Robn, on your second point, that's part of the reason why it would not make sense to call for 30% of the network serving alternative modes. But the current system is overwhelming designed to serve the needs of drivers. It poorly serves pedestrians (particularly seniors and people with handicaps) and cyclists.

I use the Orange Street bike lane all the time. But I also bike routinely on Whalley Avenue (where I have been doored). Many more risk averse/saner people are afraid to bike on city streets, even those with unprotected bike lanes. Protected bike lanes are not a panacea. But they do increase the share of people who bike.

KM

My response to door to door pollsters on the subject was very much the same…that they should spend the resources elsewhere in the city where there are zero bike lanes.

Perhaps for some additional context: From SAFE ROUTES FOR ALL - Citywide Active Transportation Plan, October 2021, page 13

60% (almost) commute by car
12% commute by transit
11% walk
9% car pool or ride share
3% bike

Of course, as these figures are for all of New Haven, they probably do not reflect the behavior of those who live/work in East Rock.

Robn, as you know, this stretch of Orange Street has just been repaved. It makes more sense to put in a bike lane here than on a street that has significant potholes on its edges (most NH arterials)..

Having said that, you're right that many other parts of the city would benefit from bike lanes. I've suggested that the city's default policy should be to install bike lanes in conjunction with milling and repaving, whenever this can be done without removing parking.

As this thread illustrates, parking is a very sensitive subject. There are relatively few corridors where current or potential bike traffic justifies the political cost of removing parking. Orange Street is one of them. Others might include Goffe Street (part of which is wide enough to accommodate a bike lane without removing parking), Chapel Street going into Fair Haven, and Davenport and Woodward Avenues. They all have sharrows now, but that does little to promote biking.

@The Good Old Days
I really hope you're joking.... you have the luxury of a driveway for your three cars - an actual solution to all your parking needs - but you park them all the street "because the street parking is so bad." This is so counterintuitive it makes my brain hurt.
You really think it's better to have an empty driveway and take three spaces from people who need them - because the street parking is that bad - just so you can not inconvenience some guests on the weekend, if you have them? Sounds like you're actively contributing to the problem.

Some excellent information on bike infrastructure and public health, safety, and more -

Science Daily
News from research organizations
Cycling lanes reduce fatalities for all road users, study shows
Roads are safer for motorists, pedestrians and cyclists in cities with robust bike facilities
University of Colorado Denver

"The most comprehensive study of bicycle and road safety to date finds that building safe facilities for cyclists is one of the biggest factors in road safety for everyone. Bicycling infrastructure -- specifically, separated and protected bike lanes -- leads to fewer fatalities and better road-safety outcomes for all road users."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190529113036.htm

Also:
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/8/14/why-drivers-should-support-bike-lanes

Also, check out 880 Cities an organization dedicated to creating "safe and happy cities that prioritize people's well-being. We believe that if everything we do in our public spaces is great for an 8 year old and an 80 year old, then it will be great for all people.
https://www.880cities.org/about-8-80-cities/

880 Cities just posted a video from Not Just Bikes -- the link is easy to find on the home page
NETHERLANDS
The Best Country in the World for Drivers
The Netherlands is famous for bicycles, and putting walking, cycling, and public transit ahead of cars. Yet paradoxically, it's the best place in the world to be a driver.

"Gold Old Days" is a great illustration of the problem of free parking on valuable city streets. Why even use your own driveway when the city gives any parking for free? Park on the street and leave the driveway free for your guests!

If the city gave away free food, "first come first served," a lot of people who can well afford a trip to the grocery store would grab some and then complain about a "food storage" when it ran out. "We can not have more residents in our city because there is not enough free food as it is!"

Free parking is no different.

How many parking tickets are issued, where and when?
It depends on the day, and it changes drastically. The one good thing about the electronic permits is that you can check by plate. A tag cannot be seen when a car is covered in snow. Private citizens should not be snooping in others people's vehicles. Some people leave the printouts visible though.

Do traffic enforcers bring in more money than they cost? They are a good investment. Residential tickets are $35; while they get paid between $19 to $22 per hour, so assuming that they do, say 4 tickets per hour they cover their salary plus the city's overhead, and they do much more. The city is trying to hire more, but at this point even Amazon pays more than that. Before you all start saying that's a lot, it's actually not. Next year that amount will be close to minimum wage in CT and these people have to be there at either 100 degrees or minus 20. They are as much enforcers as they are revenue makers, and the city keeps losing them due to low pay.

The department has had 4 directors in the last 6 months, but there's still people working there, a visit to the city's website will show this info and they can be contacted.

All of this is public information, and the tow rules are set by the alders, the enforcers have to abide by them.

Rocks, I suspect you're correct that the TTP staff bring in more than they cost. But the calculation is complicated. For state employees, salaries are about about 50% of total direct costs. I suspect that something like this ratio applies to city employees. Then there are indirect costs, e.g., for the vehicles TTP uses to enforce the meters and neighborhood zones. Finally, part of the fine revenue is not collected, due to fines waived by the city, scofflaws, and mistakes by TTP staff, who are human.

Kevin McCarthy, you're right on target when it comes to state employees, But these are city employees, some of them even part time, so the overhead is even less because there's no pension, medical insurance or even paid holidays. Look at the 884 contract on the city's website. You could literally see how much revenue each employee is bringing in by the amount of citation issued, and the city collects about 70% of that revenue in average. The Independent has published this before. So for these workers is actually not that complicated, although it's understood that they work to benefit of the city., NYC actually let's these people come in as much as they want because they know that even with the overtime and all the overhead they making the city a ton of money. It's very sad to see how the city puts this money maker (10 million las year, pandemic included, 12 million the year before) in the back burner. again, I'm going by info that has been published.

Rocks, you're right that this is not rocket science. But I would like to see the revenue/cost analysis, together with the information that my neighbor Ben Jacobs is seeking.

"I've wanted to learn how it's viewed, I'm trying to get a better sense " how the city deploys traffic resources, he said.

Good luck!!! You're not getting any data from this Mayor. Maybe some smoke and mirrors but no data.

As she put it, "I agree that it's good to compile complaints as that opens the conversation. But it took me weeks to get a car towed. I need to understand my constitutents' pain. No matter what a department is going through, they shouldn't have to go through that. Mr. Jacobs, we need to move them, not just charts. Call me a radical. After holiday time, I'm going to have a firmer conversation" with city officials.

Good luck here as well!! I've emailed Traffic and the Mayor himself about traffic abuses in Edgewood: no action. You would think that a city on the cusp of bankruptcy would want to collect the fine, right?

Nope - not this administration. It's considered politically incorrect and unequal to give out tickets.

In fact, during a recent FRAC meeting I asked why revenue from parking tags was down and was told the department is shorthanded!!! So, this city has 2 revenue sources: property taxes and parking tickets and they sit around with vacant positions in the traffic department.

When you hear things like this it tells you this Mayor is in over his head.

Kevin McCarthy on November 30, 2021 8:05pm
"Rocks, you're right that this is not rocket science. But I would like to see the revenue/cost analysis, ..."

Good luck Kevin! There is no analysis done at City Hall and nobody to do it. The City used to have a full-time Controller and a full-time Budget Director. Now Michael Gormany does both jobs. Not sure exactly how that works; either we never needed 2 ft people, or we did and one of the jobs isn't getting done.

In any event there are no resources to perform any analysis. The monthly financial report from the city is older than the bible. And if you wanted to do the analysis, you couldn't because city hall doesn't share any data with anyone.

Think about your statement: I would like to see the revenue/cost analysis (on hiring traffic agents). This City is drowning in debt, there is no money for police or parks or public works, there are a limited number of revenue sources available to the city....and we don't even have the revenue/cost analysis for one of the revenue sources. That's how dysfunctional this city is.

Heck two years ago while reading the city financial audit I noticed how revenue from parking meters dropped $1 million + and nobody knew how or why until I raised the issue. $1 million drop in revenue and nobody knew why. Turns out the parking meter vendor was holding up payments bc of a contractual dispute and the Traffic Authority didn't even realize it.

As I said, it's sad to see how a department that could be such a money maker while making the city safer and addressing quality of life issues has been left forgotten and with such careless management for so long. Let's just see if the newly appointed director brings some common sense along with all those titles and actually cares about the department and all the hard working people there. He could make a difference in the lives of a lot of people.

Dennis, the city definitely can be better managed. But Fitch just upgraded its prospect for NHGeneral Obligation bonds (the type backed by taxes) from "stable" to "positive"". While the city definitely has room for improvement, it is not on the edge of bankruptcy. And an intern could perform the analyses Ben and I are seeking.

Rocks, I wish the new TTP director well, he's a good guy. But most of the issues we have discussed are the responsibility of the Board of Alders. It is up to the BOA to determine how many staff the department has. It is up to them to create neighborhood parking zones and set the fee for a pass. And it is up to the BOA to determine the number of parking spaces are required for new developments.

Going to your comment about plate readers, I believe the city's rationale for adopting this technology is that has greater capacity. A TTP agent looking for stickers can determine whether the vehicle has a valid pass. One using a plate reader can also determine whether it has reported stolen or involved in a crime, and whether its owner has paid property tax on it.

Hi Kevin - saying the city can definitely be better managed is the understatement of the the year. I realize the need to be polite and respectful of our government officials, but we need to begin to be honest with one another if we want to have any chance for change. The reality is that this city is grossly mismanaged..it was under Harp and remains so under Elicker. And Elicker can't even acknowledge or see the train wreck right before his eyes. Think about - the city is a mess and his #1 priority is Climate Change. Very disappointing.

And yes, I realize Fitch just upgraded its OUTLOOK from
"stable" to "positive"" but it didn't change its rating. An additional $60 million from the State, $100 million from BidenBucks and no upgrade. Why? because those funds are temporary and the City's $2 BILLION in debt is rather permanent. .
And yes an intern could perform the analyses Ben and I are seeking. Heck, we could do it if they provided the data. Maybe FRAC would wake from its deep slumber? So, why isn't it done? Answer: It's not done because its not important to this Mayor or the BOA leadership.

The BOA is focused on its Unite Here contract with Yale, and the Mayor is focused on building his resume for his next political gig.

Dennis, when I worked for the legislature, I was known for my understatement. But climate change is in fact the biggest challenge facing the world in the medium to long-term. Its effects won't seriously threaten New Haven or most other places in the near term. While sea level rise is real, City Hall won't be inundated next Tuesday or a year from next Tuesday. But sea level rise is a geometric function, like compound interest. If you only pay the minimum amount on your credit card bill this month, your debt will be only slightly higher next month. But if continue doing this for years, you'll go bankrupt.

Kevin - I agree climate change is real and a big challenge. But the city is limited in its ability to make real change on this issue; we need big, bold ideas from the federal government and private sector. Making climate change the number one priority makes no sense; the city is fiscally broke, suffers from a failed school system, high crime, and a poor quality of life. We just discussed how the mayor and his staff aren't capable of figuring out how to manage traffic fines and parking zones, and we expect them to make a dent in climate change?

I don't have a problem with the parking. I get out there and find spaces for my cars during off hours when I have to. Just have to plan ahead so when we have people over I get out there and get the street spaces close for our 3 cars and then our guests don't have to worry about parking and safety and can use our driveway. "Climate change" and "Green Energy" is just another tax and control mechanism. Much easier to control the masses if you can control the fuel for their cars via the power plants versus fossil fuel distribution. Rest assured your elites will still have their gas powered massive SUV's and Private Jets.

Dennis, thanks. The fact that the city can only have a very limited effect on climate doesn't mean it shouldn't do what it can. The city can do innumerable small things to promote sustainability, many of which won't cost taxpayers anything.